penmalife® 
pH 8.5 



E 666 
.R86 
Copy 1 




Wnm 



U 




ADDRESS 

Hon. LOVELL H. ROUSSEAU 

i / 

TO I1IW CONSTITUENTS. 



To my Fellow-Citizens of the 

Fifth Congressional District of Kentucky : 



l think it due to you. as well as myself, to 
place the facts connected with my resignation 
before you in a more connected form than you 
have been enabled to have them in the brief, 
detached, and often, partisan statements of 
the press. 

I should have conveyed all 1 now wish to 
say to you in a parting speech in the House of 
Representatives, if I had been permitted to 
make that speech. 

You will see from tire extracts which I add 
as an appendix to this address,, that relate 
to the proceedings of the House on the day of 
my resignation, and which I copy from the 
Congressional Globe, that I in vain attempted 
a personal explanation, which was designed to 
unfold the motives that actuated me in the 
punishment of Mr. Grinnell. 

To do this it was manifestly necessary that 
1 should give the history of the whole affair, 
the essential part of which Was the provoking 
conduct of the member from Iowa; while, at 
the same time, the manner in which my case 
had been prosecuted by certain gentlemen on 
the floor of the House was obviously proper to 
be stated in connection with the facts in the 
case as conclusively showing that the mode of 
that prosecution, by those who were as well 
judges as accusers, was unfair and unjust to 
me personally, and also the establishment of 
an unworthy Congressional precedent. 

With those who personally know Mr. Grin- 
uell, in and out of Congress, what he could 
say as an individual would be scarcely worth 
attention ; but as a member of Congress, a 
representative who uttered the obnoxious sen- 
timents of men of more note, and remember- 
ing that these sentiments go upon the records 
of the nation, his remarks were entitled to 
some consideration. 

It was this that prompted me to give my 
attention to his repeated assaults upon the 
people of Kentucky, as well as myself. 



He calls himself a man of peace, yet shows 
himself in his attacks upon Kentucky and her 
representatives to be a blusterer who sought 
occasions to plaee himself on the journals of 
Congress as a wanton and voluntary libeller 
and assailant. 

In February last, during a speech of Mr 
Grinnell'8 in Congress, a colloquy occurred 
between himself and the Hon. Mr. Trimble, of 
Kentucky, as follows : 

Mr. GRINNELL said : 

* * * e v *• 

Yet the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. 
Trimble] says Chat the laws of Kentucky are 
honorable, just, and suited to the condition of 
that State, but does not give, what I waited to 
hear, illustrations. I charge that they are 
monstrous and daionable'laws, such as would 
be a. dishonor to th$ most barbarous nation on 
the face of the earth, and I regret to apply the 
sound political maxim that, no State or nation 
is better than its laws. I would ask the gen- 
tleman why the legislature of Kentuck; 
late session did not change or amend' thost 
laws, so that they might show that, there was 
honor in the Kentuckian heart ; that they were 
willing to mete out, justice to all men? As 
the gentleman gives me his attention, I will 
wait for a replj" if he has one to make. 

Mr. TRIMBLE. I would be happy to reply 
to the gentleman if it did not interfere with 
his remarks. 

Mr. GRINNELL. I desire an answer, and 
shall not regard it as an interference with my 
remarks, as I am speaking without a manu- 
script. 

Mr. TRIMBLE. Will the gentleman repeat 
his question ? 

Mr. GRINNELL. The gentleman says the 
laws of Kentucky are honorable, just, and 
suited to the condition of the people of that, 
State. I ask that gentleman why Kentuckv 



Ck 









.0 



V- 

C « 



? 



has not repealed or amended or changed her 
barbarous laws. 

Mr. TRIMBLE. What barbarous laws ? 

Mr. GRINNELL. Those against the loyal 
black people of the State. For instance, that 
law which makes it a penal offence for a man 
who has worn the Government uniform and 
fought our battles to go into that State. 

Mr. TRIMBLE. * * * * And having 
answered the gentleman, I desire to say that I 
do not wish to have any personal dispute with 
him. But it would seem that his remarks 
could be construed into something of that 
kind. 

Mr. GRINNELL. My questions are personal, 
and could not be otherwise. 

Mr. TRIMBLE. And your denunciations of 
the State of Kentucky, were they personal? 

Mr. GRINNELL. I was denouncing wrong 
and oppression and wickedness and crime. 

Mr. TRIMBLE. Does the gentleman intend 
those denunciations to apply to me? 

Mr. GRINNELL. Not to the gentleman, 
personally, but to the State that he is defend- 
ing here. And not only himself, but his col- 
leagues, who do the same here day after 
day. ***** 

This was the begiuning of the trouble with 
that pestilent member, lie impudently tells the 
nation, and yourselves in particular, that your 
laws are barbarous, monstrous, and damnable, 
and such as would be a dishonor to the most 
barbarous nation on the face of the earth ; and 
that you are no better than your laws, and 
asks why you do not repeal them and show 
that you have honor in your hearts. 

Now, let us analyze this accusation. Your 
laws arc; barbarous, monstrous, and damnable, 
and wquld dishonor the meanest and most 
ignorant savages, and you, being no better 
than your laws, wmilf consequently disgrace 
even such a people; while you are inferen- 
tially accused of wanting what is always ac- 
corded to savages, some sentiment of honor in 
the human heart, and that you could only 
- a*pire to a claim to some honor in the Ken- 
tuckian heart by repealing your monstrous 
and damnable laws. 

At this time I was not in my seat and heard 
none of this tirade. Judge Trimble could not 
refrain from interrupting the flow of this tor- 
rent of billingsgate, and you have seen what 
passed between them. Smarting under the 
manifest effort of Mr. Grinnell to turn the dis- 
cussion into a personal disputo, he gave him 
a fair opportunity to disclaim such a purpose. 
A just man who sought no quarrel would 
at once have disavowed such intention. But 
Grinnell replies : " My questions are personal, 
and could not be otherwise.' ' Personal, how ? 
Why, of course in the sense attributed to 
them by Judge Trimble. And, said the Judge, 
" Your denunciations of the State of Kentucky 
— were they personal?" — Again offering an 
opportunity to Grinnell to disclaim a desire to 



offend, by saying he did not intend to be 
personal; but instead of that, he insolently 
affirms that he is denouncing "wrong and 
oppression and wickedness and crime." And 
yet this man calls himself a man of peace. He 
insults your State and your people, and de- 
clines to disclaim his purpose to do so when 
repeated opportunities are presented. And in 
this same speech, in order to prove that your 
laws and yourselves ''would dishonor the 
most barbarous nation on earth," he tells this 
story : 

" And here I recall an incident. Not many years ago 
a fugitive from Kentucky, partly white, a young man, 
came to my house. After he had eaten his breakfast, 
he looked round and saw a picture on the wall— a 
representation of the Saviour on the cross,. T<(K>king 
at that picture, he said: What are they doing with 
that fellow up there?' 'Why,' said I. ' 'hat is the 
Saviour on thecross.' 'The Saviour'." ' Yes— Jesus.' 
'Oh, yes; I've heard of that fiellow. He's dead now, 
I believe.' Such is the ignorance which is the result 
of Kentucky's laws, forming a public sentiment which 
led it to be the truth of history, that before the rebel- 
lion Kentucky fattened her noble Durhams for north- 
ern shambles, and bred women and children and sent 
them down to the slave-markets of the South." * * 

Look at this atrocious blasphemj', falsely 
uttered to defame and malign your character ! 
Who believes a word of it? There is not one 
person in all the South, white or black, who 
would not denounce it as a base calumny, and 
it bears on its face the indubitable marks of 
falsehood. The blasphemy was not enough. 
To add scandal to the infamous coinage of his 
brain, he paints his negro as "partly white." 
And yet this man wantonly parades this pro- 
fane fabrication for the purpose, and the 
purpose only of outraging and insulting the 
Southern people. 

After all these attacks upon the people of 
Kentucky, he has the effrontery to utter the 
following in his tirade of 11th June : 

"Now, sir,' I wish to deny any unfriendliness to- 
wards the gentleman or towards the State of Ken- 
tucky. I deny that I ever made any remark which 
could be construed to mean anything unfriendly in 
that respect. So far from that being the case, I have 
held Kentucky in high regard. I have held in high re- 
gard the gentleman who preceded in Congress the 
gentleman from Kentucky who has spoken to-dav. 
Mis predecessor writes to me that he will be returned 
here by five or ten thousand majority." 

He says he did not assail Kentucky, that he 
did ribt ( insult her, that he is not unfriendly 
towards her, that he made no remark that 
could be construed to mean anything of that 
sort, and that he has held Kentucky, her early 
history and her statesmen, in high regard ! 

In his speech of February is the following : 

"This discussion Is not plainly promotive of the 
most commendable temper. The honorable gentle- 
man from Kentucky [Mr. Rousseau J declared on 
Saturday, as I caught his language, that if he wen- 
arrested' on the complaint of a negro and brought 
before one of the agents of this bureau, when he be- 
came free he would shoot him. Is that civilzation '.' 
It is the spirit of barbarism, that lvas too long dwelt 
in our land— the spirit of infernal regions that brought 
on the rebellion and this war. * * * * 

" Mr. SMITH. Will the gentleman allow me a 
moment '! 

" Mr. GRINNELL. I will for a question. 

" Mr. SMITH. I do not want to ask a question; 
I merely wish to make a remark. 



\ 

" Mr. GRINNELL. I decline to yield unless tor 
a question. 

"Mr. SMITH. I wish to say that my colleague 
[Mr. Rousseau J does not belong to that class of men 
that the gentleman from Iowa speaks of. He served 
in the Union cause four years during the war. 

" Mr. GRINNELL. History repeats itsolf. I care 
not whether the gentleman was four years in the 
war on the Union side or lour years on the other 
side ; but I say that he degraded liis State and uttered 
a sentiment I thought unworthy of an American 
officer when he said that he would do such an act 
on the complaint of a negro against him. 

"Mr. SMITH. I deny that my colleague made 
any such statement." 

Not content with the insults he had already 
offered to the people of Kentucky in general, 
he thus singles me out for an onslaught, 
charges me with having degraded my State, 
and uttered a sentiment unworthy of an Ameri- 
can officer. Under the circumstances this was 
an unbearable outrage. 

This calumny upon me was based upon a 
passage in my speech on the Freedmen's 
Bureau Bill, in which I had spoken of the 
outrages committed by its agents on the people 
of Kentucky, and had adduced the instance of 
Mr. Blevius and his family, which had trans- 
pired in Louisville, under my own eye. 

I had referred to a conversation with Col. 
McCaleb. agent of the Freedman's Bureau, in 
the city of Louisville, in which I had said to 
him, that if he desired to protect the negroes, 
and see that they were not imposed npon, I 
would aid him, if necessary, but if it was his 
purpose to arrest white women and children 
for trivial offences on the ex parte statements 
of negroes, so late in the day, as in the Ble- 
vin's case, that he would not try them until 
the next morning, and, to secure their appear- 
ance, imprison them in the guard house during 
the night, I opposed him, and would resist 
him, aud if he should arrest me and my family, 
and hold us and punish us in that way, I 
would shoot him, when set at liberty. I was 
speaking of the duty of a man to stand by his 
wife and children, and defend them against 
such illegal and unwarrantable and oppressive 
outrages as this. And this was the sentiment 
which Grinnell alleged degraded me, and was 
unworthy of an American officer. 

Now, all these insults offered to our people, 
and this outrage to myself, were wholly 
unprovoked. There was nothing to call them 
forth, and they were prompted alone by par- 
tisan malignity and hate of the southern 
people. I was not present in the House when 
these remarks were made, but on the next day 
saw the whole of the extracts cited above in 
the Congressional Globe, I at once rose, and 
denounced the language touching myself as a 
vile slander. Grinnell replied, and in the 
conclusion of his remarks, said: 

" If the gentleman means to say that Kentucky Is 
the only State whose sons do not turn their backs in 
tbedayof danger, then I apprise hirn that there are 
other States northward whose sons I defend from 
cowardice. It is not for me to boast that I belong to 
the profession of gory Mars, and I have not had much 
experience in fast running, but trust I have a com- 



fortable amount of that quality which means stand- 
ing mill and both awaiting hii<1 meeting the conse- 
quences of my acts and words at home and abroud.' ' 

Such is the language of this man of peace. 
He assails the courage of others, and, vaunting 
his own, Haunts it in our faces. Whether he 
in fact possessed a comfortable amount of that 
quality to which he alludes, and which he so 
insultingly parades in this speech, he and I 
know better than all others. We attained this 
knowledge on the eastern portico of the Capitol. 
If it were not a hopeless task, I would call the 
attention of that member to the words of St. 
Paul, with which, from his former profession, 
he ought to be familiar, " Let him that thinks 
he stands take heed lest he fall," aud "Let 
him boast that putteth off his armor, rather 
than him that buckleth it on." And see the 
provoking unfairness of charging me with 
assailing the courage of the soldiers from the 
free States. 1 had no such thought, and gave 
utterance to no word, which could be tortured 
into such a meaning. It is true that I said, 
(in reply to his remark, that the Iowasoldieis 
had fought on but one side in the war,) that 
"he could not put his finger on a Kentucky 
man who had turned his back upon the 
dangers of any position he had taken." This 
he attempted to distort into an imputation en 
the courage of the soldiers from the loyal states. 
The immediate provocation, which caused 
his castigation, occurred on the eleventh cf 
June. On that day, I made a speech on the 
floor of the House, and attempted to repel the 
attacks made by several members upon the 
President, and those who favored his policy, as 
well as assaults upon the southern people only 
because they were southern, and alluded to 
Grinnell and his slanders upon my State and 
myself. Thereupon, Grinnell, though a man 
of professed peace and Christian meekness, 
became greatly enraged. His frenzy was not 
relieved until he had delivered himself of the 
abusive harangue, which, having been re- 
cently published in the Kentucky newspapers, 
you have doubtless seen, and in which there 
was nothing of manner or matter within reach 
of his capacity, to which he did not resort in 
order to insult and provoke me. The whole 
thing was an unparallelled seandal to parlia- 
mentary proceedings. He was vociferous and 
blatant, and sheltered from instant responsi- 
bility by the rules of the House, and my 
forbearance, which was the result of my 
representative position on the floor of the 
House, fierce and defiant. 

I have said that his manner was vociferous 
and blatant; and though not parson-like, still 
it was the pugilistic style of the hard-headed 
patriarch of a flock ; not, however, the flock 

" Assembled by the bell — 
Encircled to hear with reverence 
The exposition of the Holy Test," 

but his manner on this occasion was rather 
that of the combative head of a pastoral assem- 



lily of four-footed innocents, in placid view of 
which the patient shepherd 

" Holds his quiet sway, 
While rams and ewes and little lambs browze near, 
And gentle lambkins cunningly do play."* 

He was making a "personal, explanation." 
It was no debate. He discussed no ques- 
tion, and did not arise to do so, but ob- 
tained leave of the House to speak of matters 
personal to himself, and necessary to his 
defence. That is what a personal expla- 
nation means. During this irritating and 
insulting harangue, two feeble efforts were 
made to call him to order. But these calls 
scarcely interrupted for a moment the tirade, 
and he went on to the end. The Speaker sat 
in his chair, and looked serenely and smilingly 
on ; and if he did not enjoy the scene, he 
certainly made little eft"ort to check it. I bore 
the infliction as well as I could, resolving 
that whatever might occur, the matter should 
be set right. This happened on Monday, and 
up to Thursday evening no apology was offered 
by Grinnell, nor- were any steps taken by any 
member of the House to vindicate its dignity 
and punish him for this gross violation of its 
privileges, aud especially of those of your 
representative. Thus abandoned by those 
whose duty it was to protect me, I felt that 
my remedy, if I had any, was iu my hands 
alone. 

And s.o I rattanned Grinnell. He unre- 
sistingly received the castigation, and repeat- 
edly said it was "all right," and promptly 
assured me that he did not wish to hurt me. 
Afterwards, however, he pretended that the 
reason he did not resist was that he was afraid 
of assassination. He was not much injured, 
though he swore before the committee that he 
was crippled iu his left shoulder and hand by 
the rattanning, and could not use them. 

A good deal has been said about the dis- 
parity in physical strength between us. Now, 
'grinnell is physically one of the strongest 
met) in Congress - . He is not tall, but must 
weigh about 180 pounds, and there are not 
three stronger men on the floor of the House 
than he. On the day after his castigation, he 
was boasting to Speaker Colfax of his prowess, 
and what he could have doue if he had chosen 
on the occasion. A great deal has also been 
said of persons present at the time of theassault, 
and my accusation was greatly magnified by- 
parading the fact that some of those present 
had pistols. Ridiculous as it was, some 
charged that it was intended to assassinate 
Grinnell. Col. Peunybaker was the only per- 
son who knew my purpose to rattan Grinnell. 
No one else knew any thing about the matter, 
ami of course could make no preparation for 
it. And yet Peunybaker, Grigsby, and Mc- 
Grew, the two latter of whom were utterly 
ignorant of, and took no part in, the thing, 
were ordered to be arrested and brought be- 
fore the House for punishment. I asked Col. 

• Grinnell in an extrusive Blirep (rrou-cr. 



Pennybaker to go with me, simply to see and 
afterwards tell what occurred. 

My case was fiercely prosecuted by Banks and 
Garfield and Wilson, and there are some inci- 
dents connected with it, which 1 cannot pass 
over in silence. Ex-Governor Boutwell of 
Massachusetts, and Wilson of Iowa, went before 
the Committee to prosecute me and prepare a 
case, which, as my judges, they were after- 
wards to decide in the House. When the 
Committee met, Boutwell asked permission to 
appear for Grinnell instead of Wilson, who 
was absent for the moment. And so Boutwell 
appeared, and questioned and made suggestions 
in the case, and- afterwards Wilson took his 
place — when Boutwell retired. When the 
stenographic reporter, who took down the 
proceedings as they occurred, presented the 
record to the Committee at its next meeting, 
I found thatBoutwell's name was omitted, and 
the questions he had asked, and the suggestions 
he had made in the progress of the investiga- 
tion, were attributed to Wilson. ■ On asking the 
reporter how it was the record was thus muti- 
lated, he replied that Messrs. Boutwell and Wil- 
son had prevailed upon him to leave out Bout- 
well's name, saying that it was unnecessary to 
insert it. The intention doubtless was to re- 
lieve the case from the appearance of persecu- 
tion, and withhold the fact, on the record at 
leiist, that both Boutwell and Wilson had 
taken part in the prosecution. Here was Bout- 
well an ex-governor of a State, and Wilson the 
chairman of the Judiciary Committee, not 
members of the committee appointed to inves- 
tigate my case, but volunteers in the matter, 
both men of position and influence, appearing 
before the Select Committee to arouse their 
passions preparatory to a calm and dignified 
and just and fair examination and decision of 
it, when it should come into the House ! Now 
this mutilation of the record, by leaving out 
Boutwell' s name, with a view of relieving the 
prosecution of a little weight, was not only an 
outrage on justice, and a fraud upon the House, 
but it was in fact an offence hard to describe by 
a milder expression than one which classes it as 
moral fraud. The object was to falsify the 
history of the case, and take from it some of 
the odium that would attach to it, by such 
evidence being spread before the public of the 
eagerness of two of the most prominent men 
of the House to harrass me; a zeal that would not 
permit of their waiting till my case properly 
came up before them, but prompted them to 
pursue me in advance before the Committee. 

When the Committee had closed its investi- 
gation, and were on the point of leaving the 
room, the reporter remembered that Mr. Wilson 
had appeared in the case for Mr. Grinnell, and 
asked in what capacity his name should go 
upon the record. I said "as counsel, of 
course." Wilson said " no," and one of the 
Committee suggested "as the colleague and 
friend of Mr. Grinnell;" whereupon Wilson 
drew from his pocket a paper saying, " Well, 



6 



1 am here in obedience to a summons ; here is 
the subpoena." He did not say his name 
should be inserted in the record as a witness, 
but I leave it to others to decide what he 
really meant by the suggestion. 

Ah, Mr. Wilson, you essayed to falsify the 
record by leaving Boutwell's name out of the 
ease as one of my prosecutors^ and now are 
you willing to drop your character as prose- 
cutor and assume the innocent and inoffensive 
one of a witness? And after all this you under- 
take to lecture me on the proprieties of congres- 
sional and social life ! 

In the discussions on the floor, Banks and 
Garfield and Wilson made speeches, and pros- 
ecuted me as if I had been guilty of a high 
felonious crime. Garfield's speech was vocif- 
erous and fierce, exhibiting great passion, and 
would have been in character with a ' ' shyster' ' 
in a Police Court of the city of New York. He 
arose, proclaiming his friendship for Griunell 
and myself, and premising, therefore, that he 
eould have no feeling in the matter, and yet, 
like an actor hired to pump up passion, began 
at once, "snorting himself into a rage," and 
raved through the case, as if his life, the spoils 
of office, or the life of his party depended upon 
convicting me. In the midst of his speech, a 
trivial fist fight occurred somewhere in the base- 
ment of the Capitol, and he lugged an account 
of that into his argument in a tragic and incen- 
diary manner "as a brutal and bloody assault" 
which he seemed to infer, called for my immedi- 
ate punishment. And thus we see a late soldier, 
a general of the army, standing on the floor of 
the House of Representatives of the United 
States, and attempting to influence its judg- 
ment in the trial of a brother member, by 
creating a sensation, and arousing the passions 
of his hearers by an exaggerated detail of a 
contemptible matter that should never have 
been heard of in that body, an affair which 
would hardly have disturbed a tea party of 
old maids. 

But all this, as well as his gratuitous denun- 
ciation of a former brother soldier, was of 
course prompted by his * friendship" for me. 
Save me from all such friends and friendship ! 
On the instant of his announcement of the fist 
light as a " bloody and brutal outrage," Mr. 
Alley of Massachusetts, with shivering limbs 
and tremulous voice, and finely acted artistic 
emotion, introduced a resolution that the young 
man, victor in the tremendous fisticuff below, 
should be arrested, and held for punishment 
by the House. The effect of this was dramatic 
in the extreme; men's faces paled, and many 
seemed to think that the world demanded 
an instant victim. The resolution was adopted, 
and the arrest of the pugilist ordered. This 
terrible interlude over, the partisan friends of 
Grinnell, grimly but triumphantly proceeded 
in the immense work before them. I looked 
on with some surprise, but more of amuse- 
ment, at this flurry caused by Garfield's efforts 
at dramatic effect upon the radical portion of 
the House. 



The case went on: Garfield insisted that 
^HmmiikmMmmm^mimmigmm^m^mm the 
House had in fact protected me. This re- 
markably steep statement was made with all 
Grinnell's slanders and billingsgate before 
him, coupled with the fact that but two feeble 
efforts were made on the part of the House to 
stop his tongue, which efforts ended as they 
began. How any gentleman could be so far 
biased as to see the thing in that light I cannot 
tell, but I venture the assertion that there was 
not a member on the floor who agreed with 
Garfield in that statement. The records of the 
House show it to be ridiculously false. 

Garfield perverted my actions and miscon- 
strued my conduct whenever he alluded to 
either. He even turned against me the candor 
and frankness with which I submitted to the 
Committee every fact within my knowledge 
touching the affair. I had no concealments, 
and so told the Committee ; and they appre- 
ciated the fact, although Mr. Garfield did not. 
Incapable of understanding a generous action, 
and judging others by himsdf, he was pleased 
to hold what was intended and offered as re- 
spectful submission to the Committee was im- 
pudence and defiance on my part. Grinnell 
swore before the Committee of Investigation 
that he caught me by the collar before I touched 
him with the rattan, to prevent me from draw- 
ing a weapon. All who witnessed the affair (as 
well as myself) know this to be false, as I had 
no weapon. I questioned Grinnell particularly 
on the point, to lay a foundation for contra- 
dicting him, and was, at the time, forced to 
make several allusions to the moment of 
striking, and what was said and done within 
the moment, which was construed by Garfield 
into a parading, on my part, of the rattanning. 
Yet, nothing was further from my mind, and 
there was no evidence that I had any such 
purpose. He railed at me, also, as being 
contumacious, for not apologizing to the House, 
as if I had anything to apologize for. The 
apology should have come from the Speaker 
and the House, and from Garfield as a member 
of it. In fact, whatever I had said or done 
was misunderstood or misrepresented by Gar- 
field. He seemed impressed with the* belief 
that the case was one in which he was called 
upon to play the pettifogger and exhibit his 
ingenuity in the quirks and twirls of disputa- 
tion, regardless of right. 

As an appropriate matter here, I insert what 
follows on this branch of the case, extracted 
from the speech of Mr. Raymond, of New York: 

"On the same day, after the debate had gone on 
some time, the gentleman from Iowa rose to reply to 
the gentleman from Kentucky, asking permission 10- 
make a personal explanation, which was granted. 
Now, I do not propose to read at length what the 
gentleman from Iowa said on the occasion. It was 
read in full yesterday at the Clerk's desk, during the 
speech of my colleague, [Mr. Hale.] But I call 
attention to the leading points of it— to this mainly, 
that it was in no sense a reply to anything the gentle- 
man from Kentucky had said. It was simply a per- 



Bona! attack upon him as a gentleman and as anoftl- 
cer of the Army, No one can read any part of it with- 
out seeing that this is its character. 

In the rirst place, he refers to his personal appear- 
ance " standing six feet high, wearing butt', and carry- 
ing the air of a certain bird that has a more than 
usual extremity of tail, wanting in the other extre- 
mity.'' He then speaks about his being a defender of 
the President, and says: 

"God save the President from an incoherent, brain- 
lesa defender, equal In valor in civil and in military 
life. His military record! Who has read It? In 
what volume of history is it found?'' * * * * * 
"Where was he in the great lights? 

Go to the general officers; and since he has alluded 
to Iowa, I will give the opinion of a leading officer of 
that state, for not two weeks ago he told me that 
when there was a noise in camp the men said that 
it was either a rabbit or General Kousseau." 

He also refers to the gentleman from Kentucky 
"having a quarrel with his barber and backed off,' 1 
and concludes with the following language: 

" I did speak something about the men from Ken- 
tucky lighting on both sides. .Sir, I have been sent 
here by a majority of seven thousand; and I do not 
go to the state of Kentucky for indorsement, nor do 
the soldiers of Iowa. Their record is made, and it 
was not made under the leadership of any man from 
Kentucky. It was made under the leadership of their 
own colonels and generals, and under General Grant 
and General Sherman. When the gentleman gets up 
here and claims the honor of having led the Iowa 
soldiers. I say that they were not so led; that they 
spurn such an intimation; and in this I mean noth- 
ing personal." * * * * * * 
"And then the gentleman whines off with a woman's 
plea, talcing refuge under feminine skirts as a certain 
other gentleman went off in disguise." 

General Banks sat in solemn silence and 
looked on, with a countenance of great 
gravity and wisdom, during the harangue 
of Wilson, and even during the magnifi- 
cently dramatic effort of Garfield to achieve 
a flurry caused by the announcement of a 
list fight, but finally, after the previous ques- 
tion — which cuts off all reply — 'Was called 
and seconded, arose to take his part in the 
mighty affair. His voice, cultivated and at- 
tuned to that of an ambitious baritone, lack- 
ing only the Italian melody and finish, rang 
out in full, but unvarying and monotonous 
notes, and penetrated every nook and corner of 
the amphitheatred hall, resounding back from 
the furtherest galleries, and heard by every- 
body in and about the building — except per- 
haps by the two chaps engaged in the san- 
guinary fist fight in the basement of the cap- 
itol. The general was eloquent, and like 
Garfield and Wilson, ever strong on the 
stronger side. In true tragedian style, he in- 
formed the House that this was a momentous 
perfod in our history. The House did not 
know, but I happened to be informed as to what 
he alluded. I had been told that before the 
Committee he contended that as the Southern 
representatives would soon be again in Con- 
■_ ress. it behooved the House to set mi example 
and make a precedent in my case that would 
deter them in all time to come from resenting 
any <iil'--ii'-es, or supposed offthces that might 
he offered them. Brave Mr. Banks ! you must 
sacrifice an humble man like myself to throw 
a shield around von. and those like von, to 



protect you in all future time ! How much 
easier and better would it be to treat men, 
North and South, like gentlemen, and thus 
avoid any, the least possible difficulty. You 
were not ignorant of Grinnell's offences when 
you made that unjust and sectional appeal. 
And you will never accomplish your purpose, 
Mr. Banks, in the way you propose. You 
may pile mountain high the paper and parch- 
ment, on which these protecting laws and 
resolutions and precedents are written, but 
they will not be the least impediment in 
the way of the retributive arm of an honor- 
able man, North or South, whose feelings are 
insulted and outraged, and whose character is 
defamed. Although I grant you it may be 
proper enough for the pharasaical of your 
party to avail themselves of the constitutional 
privileges of debate to malign and blacken the 
characters of their political opponents. 

But Mr. Banks ended, and the House decided 
to reprimand me. They were not content with 
a mere resolution of reprimand, but insisted 
upon what they considered the degradation of 
summoning me before the bar of the House, 
there to be publicly censured ; and this was 
pressed by Banks and the rest under the excus- 
able if not justifiable circumstances of my 
case, with a persistence that more resembled 
ill-will than a mere effort to attain justice. 
During all these proceedings, I was silent, 
because I felt it indelicate to take part in my 
own trial. 

My case was finally called up for the execu- 
tion of the sentence. I then asked permission 
to make a personal explanation. Leave was 
granted, and I began, but was stopped at every 
turn, as out of order, by the very men who 
had held that Grinnell's billingsgate speech 
was chaste and orderly, and in accordance with 
parliamentary rules. After repeated and friv- 
olous interruptions, finding it impossible to 
speak of the only matter about which I had 
anything to say, I gave up the effort. But I 
had resolved that whatever might befal me as 
a private man, Mr. Speaker Colfax should not 
have the opportunity te reprimand my consti- 
tuents through me ; so I resigned my position 
as a member of Congress, holding myself ready, 
personally, to receive the punishment awarded 
by the House. It was, by many members, 
thought that my resignation would render 
unnecessary, if not improper, any further pro- 
ceedings in the premises. This seemed to be 
the opinion of the Chairman of the Committee, 
the Hon. Mr. Spalding, of Ohio, who moved 
my discharge from the custody of the House. 

And here occurred another flurry, exceeding, 
if possible, that caused by the announcement 
of the fist fight in the basement. Alarm 
and disappointment were pictured on the faces 
of my prosecutors. The confusion for some 
moments was intense. Members started from 
all sides to their feet, and vociferated at each 
other and at the Speaker. Some ran after 
books of law, and others, in discordantly 



clashing tones, shouted rather than read prece- 
dents from law books and congressional records. 
The erect and energetic Chairman, in his in- 
audible efforts to keep order — hammering away 
with his mallet — was quite as impotent over 
the disturbed crowd as an automatic figure 
would have been, or a toy speaker pounding 
on a toy desk. 

Perhaps the victim mightescape ! Rousseau, 
although censured in fact by the action of the 
House, might, after all the trouble and fuss, 
get rid of the hanging and quartering that 
were set down for him in the bill, and which 
the zealous prosecutors came there to witness, 
and which some of them predicted he would 
run away from and avoid. The delight might 
not be experienced of seeing the victim march 
up with the Sergeant-at-Arms and be repri- 
manded, like a culprit, at the bar of the House. 
Radical piety could no more brook to be thus 
baffled than could Shylock in the play, or the 
good people of the old days, when intent on 
drowning a witch or burning a heretic. In 
fact, the scene was not unlike Pope's descrip- 
tion of an excited spinster : 

" Then flashed the vivid lightning from her eyes, 
And screams of horror rend the affrighted skies; 
Not louder shrieks to pitying Heaven are cast 
When husbands or when lap dogs breathe their last." 

The punishment was awarded me as an 
official, as a member of Congress, and not 
as a private man. That was the sentence, 
the judgment of the House, and they had 
really no right to punish me as an individ- 
ual under the written sentence, of which 
the description of my person as a member of 
Congress was an essential part. But neither 
right nor justice, law nor propriety, nor any 
other consideration could induce them to forego 
the pleasure of inflicting what they seemed to 
think a scape-goat or sacrificial performance 
upon me ; arid so I was to be reprimanded — the 
juvenile fist fight in the basement having been, 
meanwhile, suppressed, and the belligerents 
being safe in custody, by an imposing and 
solemn order of the house ! During this com- 
motion, I Avas sitting in the lobby, watching the 
Speaker of the House, to see when my presence 
at the bar was required, and observing him 
indicate to the Sergeant-at-Arms that he should 



conduct me to the* bar, I arose and walked 
promptly and quickly in front of the Speaker's 
•hair and received the famous reprimand, thus 
saving myself what was intended to be, and 
what I should have felt the humiliation of being 
conducted to the bar of the House, in custody 
of its officer. And thus ended the affair. 
Banks, and Garfield, and Wilson, and #ie like, 
did what they could to add to Grinnell's efforts 
to degrade me. They would have expelled 
me ; they tried their best to expel me. Failing 
in that, they would accept nothing less than a 
public reprimand at the ha$ of the House by 
the Speaker. But the circumstances of the 
case justify me to rejoice in the fact that the 
same record which will show, a hundred years 
hence, that I was assailed, insulted, and de- 
famed by the wanton and craven attack of 
Grinnell, must preserve also the evidence that 
he quietly and unresistingly submitted to the 
lash as a punishment for his offence ; and that 
I was compelled to my conduct by every appeal 
of selfrespect and honor, on account of the 
dereliction of Congress to vindicate its privi- 
leges when they were assailed by the libellous 
tongue of the member from l0wa. 

I cannot close without tendering my thanks 
to those of my friends who were silent, as well 
as those who spoke on the occasion, and es- 
pecially to Messrs. Raymond and Hale, of New 
York, republicans, and Messrs. Hogan, of Mis- 
souri, and Johnson and Boyer, of Pennsylva- 
nia, and Hon. Aaron Harding, my colleague, 
democrats, for their efforts in my behalf. And 
no less to Mr. Spalding, of Ohio, who, though 
be insisted, and conscientiously, I know, on 
my punishment, yet, whose bearing throughout 
was fair and just, and generous ; nor can I 
omit to acknowledge the spirited, magnani- 
mous, and eloquent appeal of Mr. Delano, of 
Ohto. 

You have thus, fellow citizens, a general 
conversational account of what occurred, and 
I have returned to you the trust you confided 
to me. I have no regret for my conduct in 
the matter. I would have chastised Grinnell 
at every hazard, and I would do it again to- 
morrow, under similar circumstances. No man 
shall ever insult, with impunity, my people or 
myself, and on this issue I submit the case to 
your hands. 



LOVJJLL H. ROUSSEAU. 






APPENDDL 



i the Omorentonal Globe, July 23.] 

Assault upon a Member. 

Mr. SPALDING. I now ask that the order 
of i !]•■ House he now enforced upon the mem- 
ber from Kentucky, [Mr. RofssEAt - .] 

Mr. ROUSSEAU. I ask leave of the House 
to Bay a word or two by way of personal ex- 
planation. 

Mr. ('(INKLING. Before I give my consent, 
I desire to know whether this personal expla- 
nation is to be subject to the rules of the House, 
or whether consent is to be given to go beyond 
mat, If sti, then I shall object. I shall object 
to any personal explanation except it be made 
within the rules of the House and of decorum. 

The SPEAKER. As the Chair has already 
Stated, all personal explanations are subject to 
the rules of the House. The Chair will expect 
any gentleman who may object to the language 
which may be used to make a point of order, 
upon 1 which the Chair will promptly rule. 

Mr. CdNKLING. Then I will" make no 
objection. 

No objection Was made, and leave was ac- 
cordingly granted. 

Mr. ROUSSEAU, Mr. Speaker, I hope I 
shall not forget where I am, and I will en- 
deavor to keep myself not only within the rules 
of the House, but within the rule of the strict- 
est propriety and friendly regard for every 
member of this House. 

Now. sir, that the trial of this matter in 
which I have been involved i6 over, and the 
decision of the House has been rendered, I not 
only feel myself at liberty, but I deem it my 
duty to the House and myself to say a word or 
«o in reference to it. And here, sir, I must 
express my regret that 1 should be called upon 
to remark upon a matter which has given me 
BO much pain and mortification since its occur- 
rence : and I think nothing would prompt me 
to speak at this time bat that members may 
understand the feel bigs and motires which 
prompted me, and as far as possible my whole 

i in the premises. 

I have been compelled U) sit and hear myself 

denounced on this floor in a way in which I 

that any member should denounce a 

brother-member. I do cot rise to complain of 

this ; but 1 B isfa t" SSJ that such a course does 
nut tend to good feeling, and I think I may add 
in all courtesy that the conduct complained 
hi was unfair and unjust. When the discus- 
ion "u tins subject was closing the other day. 
the gentleman from I (bio, [ Mr. Oartold,] who 
■ ith a proclamation of personal friendship 



| for me, seemed in the course of his remarks as 
; if he were prosecuting a criminal. Such ap- 
| peared to be the whole tenor of his argument, 
! as well as that of the gentleman from Iowa, 
1 [Mr. Wilson ] Now, sir, I conceive that this 
was unfair and unjust toward a member of 
this House. The members were my judges, 
and they ought to have come to the decision 
of my case uninfluenced by passion and un- 
clouded by prejudice. 

Mr. STEVENS. I must object to this. I 
submit that criticisms on the judgment of the 
House and the action of its members by a man 
under sentence are not in order. 

The SPEAKER. The Chair thinks that the 
remarks of the gentleman from Kentucky inti- 
mating that members were influenced by passion 
are certainly out of order. 

Mr. ROUSSEAU. If I have said anything 
improper I take it back. I have said that 
members should have considered and argued 
my case without prejudice and without passion. 
If I was in error in this position I am ready to 
withdraw it. If members should not deliberate 
and determine on a matter of this importance 
and delicacy, uninfluenced by passion or preju- 
dice then I am in error. 

Now, Mr. Speaker, I hope, as I remarked at 
the outset, that I shall say nothing improper. 
I appeal to this House to decide whether those 
gentlemen did not show far more passion in 
words and actions than I have shown in any- 
thing I have said, or, judging from the course 
of these remarks, what I am likely to say. 
Why, sir, in the midst of the argument of the 
member from Ohio — 

Mr. STEVENS. I must again object to this 
course of remark. It is simply a criticism 
upon what was done by this House in passing 
judgment upon the case of the gentleman ; and 
the gentleman has no right to criticise it. 

Mr. ROUSSEAU. Mr. Speaker, I do not 
criticise the judgment of the House. I am 
saying nothing about the jndgment of the 
House. I am speaking of the manner of the 
argument of the gentleman who prosecuted 
this case. 

The SPEAKER. The Chair thinks that for 
the gentleman from Kentucky to impute passion 
to other members in the argument in his case 
is not within the rule. 

Mr. ROUSSEAU. Under the ruling of the 
Speaker, I will withdraw the obnoxious re- 
mark. I was going on to say that the gentle- 
man from Ohio, [Mr. Garfield] in the midst 
of his argument, when certainly greatly exci- 
ted 



9 



Mr. MERCUR. I call the gentleman to 
order, and raise the point whether it is in order 
for him to criticise the speeches or conduct of 
members in passing upon his case. 

The SPEAKER. The Chair has already 
indicated to the gentleman from Kentucky that 
such language is not within the proper line of 
remark. 

Mr. ROUSSEAU. Well, Mr. Speaker, may 
I be allowed to say, while my case was being- 
tried, and a good deal of excitement was 
aroused in the House, that an account of a fist 
fight in some part of the basement of this 
Capitol between outsiders, alleged to have 
occurred on the instaut, was introduced in the 
midst of the debate by the member from Ohio, 
[Mr. Garfield,] with intense emotion and a 
labored and not^unsuccessful effort at dramatic 
effect to influence the minds of members, and 
that said assault was by him characterized as 
"brutal and bloody?" May I say that, sir? 

The SPEAKER.' The gentleman has said 
it. [Laughter.] 

Mr. ROUSSEAU. Then I will adhere to it. 

The SPEAKER. The Chair thinks that is 
not out of order. 

Mr. ROUSSEAU. I am very glad of that 
sir, and I will proceed with my remarks. I 
was sorry to see, sir, that when the House of 
Representatives of the United States was 
engaged in the trial of one of its members an 
effort was made to influence its decision by 
bringing into the debate such extraneous 
influences as this. Now, sir, was that either 
a proper or a timely proceeding? 

Sir, the member from Massachusetts, [Mr. 
Banks,] when everybody else was cut off by 
the previous question from saying a word, 
seemed to me, and I hope I may be allowed to 
say it in all courtesy, to be lying in wait in 
the argument; and when my mouth was dou- 
bly sealed by the proprieties of the case and 
by the previous question, he made a conclud- 
ing appeal, such as one rarely hears in any 
court of justice where the case is one of mur- 
der or of the highest crimes known to the law. 
That he had a right to do, but though I am 
ruled out of order if I should characterize that 
speech of the gentleman as animated by undue 
"passion," yet I trust I may be allowed, 
without interruption, to remark that I should 
have been better satisfied, and that the House 
could have determined the matter with equal 
justice and with better temper, without such 
an excited appeal. 

The prosecution in this case 1 must say 1 
think has been entirely unjust to me. I will 
not allege more, for I may be called to order. 
In the outset the gentleman from Massachu- 
setts — ■ 

Mr. STEVENS. I insist this is out of order. 
He is criticising the mode by which the House 
arrived at its judgment, what was done by 
members, what took place here before judg- 
ment, which a man called for sentence has no 
right to refer to. 



The SPEAKER. The Chair sustains the 
point of order ; and will read from page <4 of 
the Journal : 

"No prior determination of the House is to be 
reflected on by any member unless he means to con- 
clude with a motion to rescind it." 

Mr. ROUSSEAU. That is the furthest from 
my intention. 

Mr. STEVENS. There is no mistaking the 
course of his argument, and I object. Instead 
of the House I ask the Speaker whether the 
respondent is not to be reprimanded according 
to the order of the House. 

The SPEAKER. The Chair will read an- 
other sentence from the Manual : 

" The consequences of a measure may be reprobated 
in strong terms ; but to arraign the motives of those 
who propose to advocate it, is a personality, and 
against order." 

Mr. ROUSSEAU. I have found no fault, 
and did not intend to find fault, with the 
decision of the House. It had the right to 
make it, and I will submit to it. I am speaking 
of other facts. Am I allowed to do that? 
Am I not allowed to say that members of this 
House who were to be my judges went before 
the committee and prosecuted the case against 
me? Am I allowed to say that? 

The SPEAKER. The chair does not think 
the gentleman has the right to denounce the 
motives of members who voted on this 
proposition. 

Mr. ROUSSEAU. Why, sir, how often 
must I repeat that I am trying to conform to 
the ruling of the Speaker? I am speaking of 
the manner by which the judgment of the 
House was sought to be influenced. If I am 
not allowed to discuss that, then I have nothing 
to say. My argument will not require me to 
impugn motives. 

Mr. BANKS. I do not doubt the gentleman 
from Kentucky means to do exactly as he says, 
to speak in vindication of himself, and not to- 
impugn the motives of the House or the mem- 
bers of the House ; but he certainly does do 
that when he says the member from Massachu- 
setts lay in wait. 

Mr. ROUSSEAU. I said "lying in wait 
in the argument." I did not mean the words 
as personally offensive, and so stated. 

Mr. BANKS- The member from Massachu- 
setts spoke on that question because he was 
violently assailed, and because the committee 
was violently assailed, in the report made, and 
because by accident the gentleman from Ohio, 
who was entitled to an hour to close the 
debate, stopped before that time had expired 
and yielded to him. There was no arrange- 
ment; it was pure accident. 

Mr. GARFIELD. Will the gentleman give 
way for one momeat? 

Mr ROUSSEAU. Yes, sir. 
Mr. GARFIELD. I have never doubted 
that the remarks made by me on the subject 
before the House a few days ago, to which the 
gentleman refers, were in order. I am not 
aware that any sentence I then uttered was 



10 



ouUof order. I do not know that my motive 
for pursuing any given line of argument on 
that occasion is a proper'matter for comment 
by the gentleman from Kentucky, [Mr. Rous- 
seau.] I certainly -\vas not conscious of using 
any unfair argument, nor of being influenced 
by passion or any unworthy motive. I shall 
not enter into that qviestion, but I desire to 
say that if the action of the House in this mat- 
ter can be reviewed, and the motives and sug- 
gestions of every gentleman who has spoken 
on the subject can now be animadverted upon 
by the party under censure, it is simply re- 
versing the order, and subjecting the House to 
the reprimand of the offender, instead of his 
being reprimanded by the House. I hope, sir, 
that the. House will command that obedience 
to its authority which is due from every 
member. 

Mr. ROUSSEAU. I will relieve the gentle- 
man from any further trouble on that subject. 
I should be very sorry to abuse the evidently 
liberal courtesy of the House. 

I wish to say a single word to the gentle- 
man from Massachusetts, [Mr. Banks.] I re- 
marked, with all courtesy, that he seemed to 
have lain in wait in the argument. The gen- 
tleman says I do him injustice, and perhaps, 
if he understood me as he states he did, I do. 
I must, however, be allowed to express, in 
view of his remarkable disclaimer, my amaze- 
ment that his whole argument, or almost the 
whole of it, seemed to be devoted to me, and 
not, as he alleges, to members who assailed 
him, 

Mr. Speaker, I wish to call the attention of 
the House to the beginning of this matter. 
The gentleman the other day' — and I merely 
allude to it as preface to what I wish to say — 
remarked that I had waited four days to re- 
dress the grievance complained of. It will be 
seen that he was mistaken by a day — though 
that perhaps is a small matter. The discussion 
took place on Monday, and on Thursday even- 
ing the collision took place. It is assumed 
that in that interval my feelings had time to 
cool. I think gentlemen will agree with me 
in this that no time is long enough for "cool- 
ing" when one is defamed and maligned upon 
the record of the nation. When a man has 
been outrageously attacked in his reputation, 
especially in the enduring form of a record to 
be handed down to posterity, he is not likely 
to learn temperance by a frequent recurrence 
to that unredressed wrong. The passage of 
three days had no such effect; it could have 
•had none. I waited, as I thought I ought, to 
permit thi? House to take the matter into its 
own hands. Did the House expect trie to sup- 
plicatingly call attention to what members now 
seem so sensitively alive to, in regard to the 
dignity and privileges of this House ? The in- 
dignity had occurred on thisfloor, and members 
had stood by and allowed it to remain to stain 
their proceedings. In my judgment injustice 
was done mo ra that no gentleman brought the 



matter before the House in such form as to 
punish both the member and myself — if I 
deserved such censure. 

Mr. BOUTWELL. I ri&'to a point of order. 
The House has already passed judgment upon 
the remarks made on that occasion as well as 
upon the conduct of the gentleman. 

The SPEAKER. The gentleman has the 
consent of the House to make a personal ex- 
planation, but the Chair does not think it goes 
to the extent of reprobating the action of the 
House of Representatives. If that could be 
allowed, then the gentleman who is now before 
the bar of the House would have the right to 
inflict a reprimand and censure upon the House 
for dereliction of duty in some particular. 

Mr. ROUSSEAU. I am not reprobating 
the action but the non-action of the House. 
Nor can 1 understand that reference to the 
mode in which my case has been prosecuted 
by particular members of this House is a repri- 
mand upon the collective House or a reflection 
on its judgment ; yet I will pass the matter by. 
Mr. JENCKES." Is it in order to withhold 
the consent of the House to allow the personal 
explanation? 

The SPEAKER. It is not. The House has 
consented to allow a personal explanation. 
The gentleman can require that a majority of 
the House shall consent to his proceeding fur- 
ther in order. When the Chair sustains the 
point of order that ends his power. Any mem- 
ber can then require a vote of the House whether 
the member shall proceed in order. 

Mr: ROUSSEAU. I was going on to say, Mr. 
Speaker, that I felt aggrieved by the abuse that 
I thought I had received upon this floor ; but 
I waited for the House to take action in the. 
matter. I was also informed on the day after 
the occurrence took place, that the member 
from Iowa would tender me a written apology. 
That, together with the reasons assignpd, 
caused the delay, and I waited until Thursday. 
No member of the House having called the 
matter up or taken any steps to assert the dig- 
nity of the House, assailed as it had been, per- 
haps by myself as well as the other member, I 
thought the matter had assumed an entirely 
personal aspect, and, as such, my only remedy 
was in my own hands. But I wish the mem- 
bers of the House to believe that it was the last 
thing in my mind, to offer an indignity to this 
body. I think I evinced my respect to the 
House. I think I could not have given a 
higher evidence of my regard for the peace and 
dignity of this House than I then manifested ; 
and I assert my belief that scercely a member 
on this floor would have submitted to what I 
did. I went beyond the walls of this Chamber 
to adjust the matter. I did not think it was 
a privilege secured by the Constitution of the 
United States to members of this House' to de- 
nounce, defame, and slander any person upon 
this floor. I did not believe that it was the 
privilege of one member of Congress to slander 
the character of another member. 



11 



Mr. PRICE. I make the point of order that 
my Colleague [Mr. Grinnell] not being pres- 
ent, and the remarks of the gentleman being 
calculated to reflect upon him very severely, 
thev were not in order. 

-The SPEAKER. The Chair sustains the 
point of order. The House has passed judg- 
ment on the entire transaction, and it is not 
now open to review. 

Mr. ROUSSEAU. Very well; I did not 
intend to be out of order. I wish to read from 
Judge Story on this subject. 

Mr. STEVENS. As it seems impossible to 
confine the gentleman within the ruling of the 
Chair, I ask that he be required to take his 
-seat. 

Mr. WARD. I move that the gentleman 
from Kentucky [Mr. Rousseau] be allowed to 
proceed in order. 

The SPEAKER. The Chair has stated what 
be regards as in order. 

The question was taken on Mr. Ward's 
motion; and there were — ayes 78, noes 31. 

So the motion was agreed to ; and Mr. 
Rousseau was allowed to proceed. 

Mr. ROUSSEAU. I am much obliged to the 
House for giving me this permission, and I 
shall occupy its time but a few minutes further. 
I wish to know, now, if it is in order to 
have read those extracts from Mr. GrinneltAs 
speech, which are included in the report of the 
committee ? 

The SPEAKER. The Chair thinks not. It 
is opening up the question anew, and the Chair 
would have to give the floor to the gentleman 
from Iowa to replj'. 

Mr. ROUSSEAU. Very well ; I yield, then, 
the whole matter, since the ruling of the Chair 
manifestly excludes about all that I wish to 
state by way of explanation. 

I wish to say now to the House that I am 
here to-day to submit to the punishment it 
has chosen to inflict upon me, but I am 
unwilling that my constituents in my per- 
son shall be subjected to reproof in this way, 
and I look upon a seat in Congress as worth- 
less when coupled with an imputation which 
rests alike upon constituents and Representa- 
tive. I have sent ruy resignation to the post- 
office in this building, and I send a copy of it 
to the Clerk's desk and ask that it may be 
read. In thus resigning my seat I wish to add 
with emphasis that I am not seeking to avoid, 
much less to evade, the judgment of the House, 
for I am here to receive it. I shall submit 
•cheerfully to your final action in the matter. 



The Clerk reads as follows : 

Washington, D. C, July 21, 180C. 
Governor: The majority in the Home of Repre- 
sentatives of the United States have directed the 
Speaker to have me brought to the bar of the House 
and there reprimand me for an assault mi the mem- 
ber from Iowa for unbearable insults prered me by 
that member. I feel that this sentence is unjust to 
the people I represent, as well as to myself, and I am 
unwilling they should be thus humiliated in my per- 
son as their Representative. I therefore respectfully 
resign my office as member of Congress from the 
fifth congressional district of Kentucky , and beg leave 
to forward the same to you. 
I have the honor to be, <fec., 

I.OVEUL II. ROUSSEAU. 
His Excellency, Thomas E. Bramlktte, 
Governor of Kentucky. 



The Fist Fight. 

The fist fight alluded to by me occurred 
between a radical newspaper reporter, who 
was thrashed, as I understood, for some alleged 
interference in political matters ; this man was 
also a clerk to a House Committee. The fight 
was a small affair, and the whipped reporter 
was not injured, I hear, in any noticeable way. 
The account of this fight was lugged into his 
speech against me by Garfield, who exclaimed 
in substance : " Look at the example of Rous- 
" seau ! Even while I speak a bloody and 
"brutal outrage has been perpetrated on an 
"officer of this House, who lies weltering in 
"his blood," or words to that effect. Of course 
there is no mistaking the object of such appeal, 
made while my case was under discussion. It 
was the artifice of a pettifogger, and a dema- 
gogue. I subjoin what follows from the Con- 
gressional Globe, in explanation of what I have 
said was the action of the. House in this 
contemptible case: 

[From the Ojiiyressional Globe.} 

ASSAULT ON A COMMITTEE CLERK. 

Mr. ALLEY. I wish to say, in connection 
with the allusion just made by the gentleman 
from Ohio, [Mr. Garfield,] that a most brutal 
and unprovoking outrage has just been com- 
mitted upon an officer of 'this House, and I 
therefore desire to submit for the consideration 
and action of this House, at this time, the res- 
olution which I send to the Clerk's desk. 

The Clerk read the resolution, as follows : 

Resolved, That whereas a violent personal assault 
has been committed upon the person of U. H. Painter, 
the clerk of the Committee on the Post Office and 
Post Roads, by two persons now in the cutody of the 
police officers of the Capitol, the Sergeant-at-Arms is 
hereby directed to take into his custody the assail- 
ants, and to detain them until the further orders of 
the House upon the subject. 



LIBKHRY OF CONGRESS 



013 785 678 5 , 



\ 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



013 785 678 5 • 



